EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Comparative multicenter trial of teicoplanin versus cefazolin for antimicrobial prophylaxis in prosthetic joint implant surgery



Comparative multicenter trial of teicoplanin versus cefazolin for antimicrobial prophylaxis in prosthetic joint implant surgery



European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases 18(2): 113-119



A randomized multicenter study was carried out in 12 centers in Italy to compare administration of a single dose of teicoplanin (400 mg i.v. bolus at time of anesthesia) versus that of five doses of cefazolin over a 24-h period (2 g at induction of anesthesia and 1 g every 6 h postoperatively, i.v. bolus) as antimicrobial prophylaxis in patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty. Of 860 patients enrolled, 427 received teicoplanin and 433 cefazolin. A total of 846 patients (422 teicoplanin and 424 cefazolin) were evaluable for safety and 826 patients for efficacy. Six patients (1.5%) in the teicoplanin group and seven patients (1.7%) in the cefazolin group developed a surgical wound infection during their postoperative hospital stay: this difference was not significant. Proven or suspected infections involving other body systems occurred in 114 patients (57 in each group). Seven hundred ninety-two patients completed a 3-month evaluation and 738 patients a 12-month evaluation; the success rates in evaluable patients at these observation times were 99.2% and 99.7% for teicoplanin and 99.2% and 99.7% for cefazolin, respectively. Adverse events occurred in three (0.7%) teicoplanin patients and nine (2.1%) cefazolin patients (P=0.083). A single preoperative dose of teicoplanin ensures adequate surgical antisepsis, with results comparable to a standard multiple-dose regimen of cefazolin.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 010352970

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

DOI: 10.1007/s100960050238



Related references

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in prosthetic joint implant surgery A comparative multicenter trial between teicoplanin and cefazolin. Abstracts of the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents & Chemotherapy 34(0): 5, 1994

Teicoplanin vs cephamandole for antimicrobial prophylaxis in prosthetic joint implant surgery: (preliminary results). European Journal of Surgery. Supplement. 567): 19-21, 1992

Antibiotic prophylaxis in prosthetic vascular surgery A prospective, randomized, double blind trial comparing teicoplanin to cefazolin. Abstracts of the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents & Chemotherapy 37: 318, 1997

Prospective, randomized, double-blind trial comparing teicoplanin and cefazolin as antibiotic prophylaxis in prosthetic vascular surgery. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases 18(3): 175-178, March, 1999

Prophylaxis in gynecological and obstetric surgery a comparative randomized multicenter study of single dose cefotetan versus two doses of cefazolin. Chemioterapia 7(4): 245-252, 1988

Short-term versus long-term antimicrobial prophylaxis in abdominal surgery: a multicenter open randomized comparative trial. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 39(10): 770-772, 2005

Perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery. A prospective randomized trial comparing two day cefuroxime prophylaxis with four day cefazolin prophylaxis. Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 27(3): 300-306, 1986

Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery: a prospective randomized comparative trial of cefazolin versus ceftriaxone. World Journal of Surgery 14(2): 277-277, 1990

Antibiotic prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery: a prospective randomized comparative trial of one day cefazolin versus single dose cefuroxime. Drugs Under Experimental and Clinical Research 19(5): 229-234, 1993

Teicoplanin for skin and soft tissue infections: An open study and a randomized, comparative trial versus cefazolin. Journal of Infection and ChemoTherapy 5(1): 40-45, 1999

Teicoplanin for skin and soft tissue infections: An open study and a randomized, comparative trial versus cefazolin. Journal of Infection and ChemoTherapy 5(1): 40-45, 2002

The effect of antimicrobial prophylaxis for thoracic noncardiac surgery: thienamycin versus cefazolin. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Research 8(4): 267-269, 1988

Antibiotic prophylaxis in high-risk biliary operations: multicenter trial of single preoperative ceftriaxone versus multidose cefazolin. American Journal of Surgery 148(4a): 15-18, 1984

Comparative efficacy of teicoplanin and cefazolin for cardiac operation prophylaxis in 3027 patients. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 120(6): 1120-1130, 2000

A double-blinded, randomized, controlled clinical trial to compare cefazolin and cefonicid for antimicrobial prophylaxis in clean orthopedic surgery. Israel Journal of Medical Sciences 31(1): 62-64, 1995